Vote no on Proposition 8
California voters will decide the fate of 12 state initiatives on Nov. 4, and easily the most talked-about is Proposition 8, the California Marriage Protection Act. This measure would ban gay marriage in California, embedding in the state Constitution language defining marriage as something that can only take place between a man and a woman.
In our view, Californians should reject Proposition 8.
First of all, California marriage doesn’t need to be protected from gay people. Gay people pose no threat to the institution of marriage, to traditional families or to society at large.
California’s large gay population includes countless committed relationships, countless extended families in which people care for each other and their relatives with compassion and love, and many gay couples are raising children.
Gay people deserve equal treatment under the law, as our U.S. Constitution calls for all men — and women — to be treated equally.
For many people of faith, gay marriage is a religious issue. We understand that many people are opposed to homosexuality and want to raise their children accordingly. That is a choice to be respected — and a choice that would be undisturbed by the outcome of Proposition 8, whatever it may be.
While advocates of the measure say that its failure would result in public schools teaching tolerance for gay marriage, Proposition 8 says nothing about schools and would do nothing to change curriculum.
In fact, the measure would do only one simple thing, add the following phrase to the California Constitution: “Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Earlier this year, the California Supreme Court determined that such a statement violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.
In our view, Proposition 8 is a misguided and unconstitutional proposal. We urge voters to reject Proposition 8.
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our
virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact
online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
kbf wrote on Sep 17, 2008 5:50 AM:
Ruff Limblog wrote on Sep 17, 2008 6:58 AM:
However, at least they came down on the side of equal protection under the law.
~Ruff "
MP wrote on Sep 17, 2008 8:55 AM:
Ruff Limblog wrote on Sep 17, 2008 8:58 AM:
And if you can find such a passage, why would the civil government be bound to enforce laws based on a religious text?
Most people can remember the huge peer pressure on kids in school to conform to 'norms' of behavior.
Therefore it would be an act of courage for a child who thinks they are a female in a male body to use the female restroom, considering the potential for ridicule and harrassment by other kids.
Transgender kids do not need a law restricting where they go to the bathroom. Both sexes will end up using a stall, think about it.
The even smaller number of transgender kids who want to use a bathroom appropriate to their mental image of themselves is an even more microscopic threat to 'Tradition' than the much more numerous gay people who want to marry.
But at least the talk of churches being legally sued to allow gays to marry in them if the church objects has stopped.
I am always just a bit surprised that some, not all, religious folks feel the need to attempt to force people to obey their faith's rules.
If gays aren't welcome in a church, there are churches that will make them and their wedding plans welcome. The ability to go to a church that welcomes you, or just stay home and watch football, is called religious freedom.
People of faith can demonstrate their unshakeable failth by allowing other people the same constitutional freedom of religion they enjoy.
~Ruff "
steph wrote on Sep 17, 2008 10:20 AM:
I don't want teachers to promote intolerance to children.
I'm voting "No" on 8. My husband, too, he'll vote "No" on 8. And when my children are old enough to vote, if they vote they way they've been taught at home, they'll vote "no" on discriminatory legislation. We don't fear civil rights. I do fear theocracies. "
glenroy wrote on Sep 17, 2008 10:44 AM:
The ‘mantra’ here ties directly to prop 8, once gay/lesbian marriage is legal ‘they’ need to ‘rescue and promote’ with ‘their’ share of the public education budget…….it wasn’t that long ago their definition of equality was legalizing same sex sex…..’give an inch and take a mile.’ They already have special status in employment and housing….there are many gay and lesbian business owners who would never hire or rent to a straight person…..try doing that to a lesbian or gay man based on lifestyle….I
What consenting adults do with each other is their business….the problem here is there is no way to vote Yes on 8 without approving an intrusion into the public school system….that’s how it works here on the left coast….our public schools no longer have any sense of the line between education and parent responsibility….and for that more than a little credit goes to the gay/lesbian advocates. "
Common Sense wrote on Sep 17, 2008 10:48 AM:
1.) Just because people have the right to do it DOESN'T mean the representative government of the people has to encourage it as a 'best practices' method.
2.) Not all ways of doing things are equal and beneficial for society...and the way we decide in a democracy is MAJORITY VOTE. I seem to recall we voted on this before, and the majority was ignored... "
glenroy wrote on Sep 17, 2008 10:58 AM:
aleph wrote on Sep 17, 2008 11:11 AM:
Not everyone holds the same religious believes and so it is wrong to force strict religious arguments against proposition 8.
I have noticed that today's generation is more open minded and willing to accept unlike older people who stick to what they believe to be true and not budge a bit. Proposition 8 is only furthering the rights of gays and lesbians, the rights they deserve. Anyone who has read a history book knows the consequences of segreagation, they're not acceptable.
Think of it this way: if you feel "reverse racism" and feel stuck, then think of what a gay and lesbian couple feels. Be openminded, it's 2008!
California has the opportunity to become a leader of social justice, which in the end benefits everyone. "
Rich wrote on Sep 17, 2008 11:23 AM:
Dwayne wrote on Sep 17, 2008 11:48 AM:
onthetrail wrote on Sep 17, 2008 12:25 PM:
First of all, what "special status in employment and housing" are you refering too? If you are refering to the laws that prevent an employer or landlord from discriminating against you by not hiring you, firing you or not renting to you because of your sexual orientation, gender, race or religon, those laws were put in place to protect everyone, including you, not just gays.
Secondly, if you do in fact know a gay business owner (which I find highly unlikely that ANY gay person would admit to knowing you) that is discriminating against straight people, you should report them to the appropriate agency to be investigated.
Thirdly, I find it interesting that someone who thinks he is so knowlegable on this subject, cannot even get the facts straight, (no pun intended) "listen to what the advocates behind Prop 8 espouse….they are demanding all early education be gender neutral, that all educational books specifically include homosexual lifestyles…..mandatory same sex-sex indoctrination beginning no later than early adolescent…..mandatory gender neutral, gay & lesbian High School education and campus support groups with tax payer funded professional counseling…" HUH? The 'advocates' of prop 8 want to outlaw gay marriage!
And finally, WHY are you watching Barney Frank on CNBC??? I think you would be much more content and calmer if you stick to watching Bill O'Reilly on Fox. (of course, that is probably where you got all these bogus "facts" in the first place!) "
Ruff Limblog wrote on Sep 17, 2008 1:17 PM:
However, there are people who are openly gay, such as Rachel Maddow, who are not nearly as scarey as the folks who 'dress strange' on Gay Pride day.
All of the governmentally enforced social prejudices have one by one been rolled back by actions from below.
For example, NO politician got up first and said, "It's time to put an end to Jim Crow", until the government had to choose between peaceful change from the likes of Martin Luther King, or the more radical change agents like Malcolm X.
Change to democratic government comes from the bottom up, not from the top down.
After a while, the rights of gays and lesbians are going to be another unremarkable part of living in California and eventually living in the USA.
When the intolerant die off, nobody will be left to be angry that gay people can get married, visit their loved ones in the hospital, inherit, or cover their family members with insurance... same as everybody else.
And frankly, my wife and I think that is going to be great!
~Ruff "
onthetrail wrote on Sep 17, 2008 1:52 PM:
I dont even know why I bother to rebuff some of these commenters, I am not going to change their minds.
I think what concerns me the most is not that they have an opposing opinion, it is the outright hatred that is expressed against a group of fellow human beings that simply want to be able to express their commitment, love and loyalty to each other with the same legal rights as everyone else.
There are so many bad things going on in the world today, that I find it difficult to understand why they dwell on this issue. "
pharper wrote on Sep 17, 2008 3:42 PM:
Interracial marriage, anyone? "
aleph wrote on Sep 17, 2008 4:37 PM:
in this case homophobia. "
John Richards wrote on Sep 17, 2008 10:15 PM:
John Richards wrote on Sep 17, 2008 10:25 PM:
Not quite right. Jesus clearly despised the Pharisees. He also taught people to hate sin and sinful acts, and to hate those who kept people from following him, see Luke 14:26. "
John Richards wrote on Sep 17, 2008 10:35 PM:
The word Phobia once meant 'fear of'. But they have distorted the plain meaning of that word so that 'homophobia' is now applied as a pejorative description of anyone who dislikes homosexuality. "
Raven wrote on Sep 18, 2008 4:41 AM:
Raven wrote on Sep 18, 2008 4:42 AM:
a teacher wrote on Oct 1, 2008 10:31 AM:
I teach in public schools. That is complete and total elephant poop. It's the same lies and exagerations you guys foist on us when this comes up. You are full of "it". "
a teacher wrote on Oct 1, 2008 10:34 AM:
It's all part of the American way. Democracy in action. God Bless America! "
hawkins707 wrote on Oct 26, 2008 5:11 PM:
christian love wrote on Nov 4, 2008 10:25 AM:
My wife is in no way comporable to my pet! Maybe your wife is, but not mine! Or maybve you are part of the 63% of prop 8 supporters who are divorced! Yeah divorced heterosexuals are definately the ones who should be worried about "protecting marriage"
I have to say, I would be worried if I were you too, since anyone would rater marry a dog than you! "